Alok Sharma, J. - (1.) THE applicant -wife, Ekta, has filed this transfer application under Sec. 24 CPC for transferring to the Family Court, Ajmer application No. 311/2013, filed by the non -applicant -husband, Satish, under Sec. 6 of Hindu Minority & Guardianship Act, 1956 (hereinafter the Act of 1956), before the Family Court, Tonk for the custody of his minor son. The facts of the case are that the applicant and the non -applicant were married at Malpura, Tonk (Rajasthan) on 06.07.2006 according to Hindu Rites & Rituals and have a male child from their marriage. On 01.11.2011, the non -applicant -husband left the applicant -wife at her parental house allegedly for reason of demand of dowry not being met. The applicant is since residing at Nasirabad with her parents. A criminal complaint at the instance of the applicant was filed against the non -applicant before the Judicial Magistrate, Nasirabad, Ajmer. On the said complaint, FIR No. 3/2012 was registered at Police Station Nasirabad City, District Ajmer for offences under Sec. 498A, 406, 323 I.P.C. Following, the police filed charge -sheet under Sec. 498A I.P.C. against the non -applicant. A criminal Case No. 84/2012 for an offence under Sec. 498A I.P.C. is presently pending before the Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) & Judicial Magistrate, Nasirabad, District Ajmer wherein the non -applicant is facing trial.
(2.) THAT the non -applicant -husband filed an application under Sec. 6 of the Act of 1956 against the applicant for the custody of his minor son before the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Malpura, District Tonk wherein it was stated that the decree of divorce has been passed on 10.10.2012. Subsequent to the formation of the Family Court in Tonk, the aforesaid application was transferred to the Family Court, Tonk on 11.03.2013. Hence this transfer application. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that it would be extremely inconvenient and cause great hardship in the event the applicant were required to travel to Nasirabad to Tonk to contest the application under Sec. 6 of the Act of 1956 filed by the non -applicant. Relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Rajni Kumar vs. Raghvinder Sahay @ Lal Babu, : 2009 (1) WLC (SC) Civil 530 and Samita Bhattacharjee vs. Kulashekhar Bhattacharjee, : 2008 (1) WLC (SC) 637, it has been submitted that it is the consistent practice of the Courts that convenience of the wife is to be taken into consideration for transferring of matrimonial dispute to the places of their residence unless special/extraordinary circumstances militate against such a transfer. It has been further submitted that in any event a criminal Case No. 84/2012 between the parties is pending before the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) & Judicial Magistrate, Nasirabad, District Ajmer wherein the non -applicant is already facing trial.
(3.) NO one has appeared on behalf of the non -applicant -husband in spite of service.;